Marquise's response to Peirce

The recent piece written by Gareth Peirce entitled “The Framing of al – Megrahi” had numerous errors of fact and the record needs to be corrected. I will ask her these questions-- How many days of the trial did you attend? How many trial transcripts have you read? What do you know—first hand—about the investigation? I think I know the answer to those questions. If I am right, her credibility should be in doubt. There has been so much misinformation published about the Lockerbie case over the past several years. It is time individuals get information from real sources rather than the internet and bloggers. If one of these people who call themselves historians, architects, observers and experts would spend some time with those of us who were there and know the facts, I think a different record develop.

I found I only agreed with Ms. Peirce on one topic. The release of Mr. Megrahi was based on greed—the wishes of officials in the United Kingdom to access Libyan oil and business ventures. My own Government is no better. In 2004, when Gaddafi “accepted responsibility for the actions of his agents,” the United States allowed that to stand as his formal admission of guilt for the Lockerbie attack. It should be noted that he told a reporter, “off the record,” as far back as 1993 that his government was involved in the plot to blow up Pan Am Flight 103. Unfortunately, this “real” admission has received little publicity.

The rest of Ms. Peirce’s lengthy article had so many errors of fact that I will try and address them in “bullet” form to make it easier to follow:

• Ms. Peirce says the investigation should have been conducted by Scottish police alone without interference from other agencies or countries. Clearly she lacks a basic understanding of the world. There is no way the police in Scotland could or should have carried out the investigation alone. We live (and did in 1988) in a global society. Good police and intelligence relationships are key if we are to protect our society from those who would do us harm. These relationships were not as advanced in 1988 resulting in many missteps but we worked through the process of understanding the nuances of each system. This case would not have been solved without the FBI, Scottish police and officers from Germany, Malta, Sweden, Switzerland and England working together, as a team. No one agency could have done it alone.

• Ms. Peirce indicates this investigation should have been conducted with “utter integrity.” I and my colleagues take great exception to this slander. The investigation was conducted with integrity and we only followed the facts and presented them to a court which found Mr. Megrahi guilty.

• There is discussion of unauthorized people (FBI and CIA) at the crime scene in Scotland. This scene which would encompass over 1400 square kilometers could not effectively be secured and police had to constantly tell local citizens not to pick up debris. However, although much has been reported, not one “confirmed” sighting of an American walking unattended has ever been documented (see trial transcripts). The Americans who would eventually come to the site were those who were helping identify bodies and if one went into the field, they were accompanied by a police officer. To believe that both the CIA and FBI had the bureaucratic ability to send large numbers of people to the scene immediately and then to spirit away luggage (assuming one knew where to look in this massive crime scene) is just incomprehensible. Yes, and then there were the helicopters…..also unbelievable.

• There is much discussion about the “original” suspects—the PFLP-GC. Based on available public source information at the time, they indeed were our original suspects. This suspicion was enhanced when a piece of circuit board of a Toshiba radio was found at the crash site. PFLP-GC terrorists had used a similar (but not the same) brand of radio before. However, although this avenue was pursued for over two years, no evidence of any PFLP-GC involvement was ever found. The key word is evidence and I believe Ms. Peirce, as an attorney, knows, that is what one needs to have a court reach a finding of guilty.

• Although not said specifically, it is implied that the shopkeeper in Malta who sold clothing which had been found in the wreckage (by very capable Scottish officers) identified Abu Talb, a Palestinian terrorist living in Sweden, as the purchaser of the clothing. This is just not true. This shopkeeper only identified one photograph in a police photo array—Mr. Megrahi—in February 1991. When the shopkeeper was interviewed in 1989 he had said the purchaser had a “Libyan accent.”

• Ms. Peirce may recall that although Iran and the PFLP-GC were our original suspects and the media reported as much in early 1989, an (at the time) unidentified individual walked into the US Embassy in Austria (January 1989) and left a message for the Ambassador. In it he said that Libya was responsible for the bombing. His note said he had been in Tripoli in December 1988 and believed that if he could believe what he was reading in the press—we were focused on Iran and Palestinians—then we were wrong and investigators should look at Libya. This man would be identified nearly two years later as Edwin Bollier, the man whose company built the timer which was part of the bomb.

• The investigation would prove that only 20 of these timers had ever been made and all had been delivered to Libyan intelligence officials. A statement made nearly 20 years later by Ulrich Lumpert, a technician who worked for Bollier that he had stolen one of the circuit boards from his company and made it available to “someone who was investigating the Lockerbie case” in 1989, has no credibility. No one associated with the Lockerbie investigation had ever heard of the MEBO Company in 1989. We did not find them until late 1990. Bollier and Lumpert each testified in 1990 that they only purchased a small number of the circuit boards and made 20 or 21 timers. When the Libyans came looking for additional timers in December 1988, Bollier had none. Bollier now says he was offered $4 million to link Libya to the attack. That is not true because by the time he alleges this happened he had already linked Libya to his timers at a magistrate hearing in Switzerland. Lumpert and Bollier’s change of heart became clear in 2008. Bollier said on a BBC special he hoped to get up to $200 million from Libya if he helped free Megrahi. Lumpert, before he filed an affidavit stating he had lied at the trial made it clear that he had sought legal advice and determined he could not be prosecuted for these earlier “false statements.”

• One remark (actually interspersed throughout the piece) stated that the CIA took control of the investigation. When I shared that with my colleagues in Scotland, they were amused because somehow, no one had ever relayed that message to them. The Scottish police were always in charge. Yes, we negotiated and often disagreed about what we would do next, but the FBI and Scottish police worked together, neither side forgetting where the crime scene was and who had “primary” jurisdiction. At no time was the CIA (or any intelligence service) “in charge” of the investigation. They supported the police in Scotland, just as the FBI and the other police agencies around the world did. Vincent Cannistraro did retire in 1990—before the EVIDENCE led us to Libya and he did not come back. In fact, if you speak with any police officer in Scotland, I doubt any of them ever met him and I only recall him being at one meeting involving this case. It was not in a leadership capacity.

• A number of assertions were made about the type of timer which was used at Lockerbie. We had initially assumed it was a barometric timer favored by the PFLP-GC. This timer would have exploded after reaching an altitude above 15000 feet. The timing mechanism was erratic (based on examination of similar devices found in Germany) and could have exploded from 1 minute and as long as an hour after being triggered, if it exploded at all. We believed the timer used as part of the bomb was one manufactured by MEBO and given to Libyan officials.

• Ms. Peirce’s attack on the FBI laboratory had more erroneous information. Tom Thurman was not barred from the FBI laboratory and was used as an expert witness after the IG report was written; however, I have no intention of using this forum to do what I consider a needless defense of him. The issue is the FBI lab. The identification of the fragment which led to the MEBO timer was done by Mr. Thurman based on a photograph. As an investigator—something most lab examiners are not—he was able to figure out where to go to look for a possible match to the fragment recovered by Scottish police officers. Once he identified the fragment, he asked Alan Feraday to come to Washington. Feraday brought the original fragment of the timer with him and they both examined it under a microscope. They independently agreed it was identical to the MEBO timer. The fragment was never out of the control of Mr. Feraday and returned with him to the lab at RARDE.

• I am not an attorney and have no idea what Hans Kochler saw at the trial which caused him to doubt the verdict. I do know he is neither a policeman nor is he an attorney. The case which was presented was circumstantial and these cases are often more reliable than those having eyewitness identification

I have only addressed part of Ms. Peirce’s concerns. However, for all of these “circumstances” to have been true as accepted by the three original trial judges, the overall case must have been credible. In order for it all to be wrong, there would have to have been a conspiracy of the grandest order and I will state without hesitation—that is false! Wrong! To somehow believe that dedicated law enforcement officers would somehow take world politics (US-UK intervention in Kuwait) to make a case against an innocent party does not know what makes us who we are. We followed the evidence. To state or even imply otherwise is an insult to all of us who only sought a righteous solution and justice for the victims.

9 comments:

Its great that Mr Marquise has offered to meet with all the doubters. I am late to this affair but became interested only after the Megraghi release.Can I come along and watch when the meeting takes place? I think so much will be resolved!

There are a few points he could clear up before the meeting, though. He forgets the certainty which the Palestinian connection was touted in the immediate aftermath of the bombing. As a leading Lockerbie investigator he must be aware of what the false evidence was. What was it and how was it refuted?

I have met many people from North Africa and the Middle East but I still can`t differentiate between accents. Could Mr. Gaucci? When this was put to the test,as no doubt it was, how many non Libyan accents was Mr Gaucci asked to listen to when he demonstrated to investigators that he could pick out a Libyan one? Had he failed to do pick out a Libyan one then the whole Libya connection would have been in doubt, as it would have been clear that Mr Gaucci had lied about recognising the source of the accent.It occurs to me that I have never heard of such a test being done, though any investigator worth his or her salt would have insisted upon one.

Who identified Bollier as the unidentified informant? I`m sure Bollier could be interviewed now? Doesn`t he post on this site? If he was the informant and now denies it, how much more does he know regarding this case? Attempting to pervert the ends of justice is a criminal offense in Scotland. Surely this matter was further investigated.Of course the investigators had never heard of MEBO till late 1990.This does not mean that anyone trying to forge a Libya connection to Lockerbie wouldn`t know about their dealings with Libya.As I understand it, men like Swire and Black are not saying that investigators on the ground fabricated the evidence, but that they were too credulous in accepting the Libyan connection so easily.

Mr Marquise says that the CIA did not control the investigation but supported the police. What was the nature of that support? What information did they have about Mary`s House, MEBO,Megraghi etc that police could not have found themselves.All the evidence presented at the trial was the result of good old fashioned police work, or so it was implied.So, what did the CIA uncover? Remember that all this was around the time of the Iran Contra scandal. Surely any CIA involvement would undermine the legitamacy of an investigation at that time.I hope that, in the absence of any formal inquiry, more of those who were involved in the original Lockerbie investigators will answer questions about their work. And lets follow the new evidence too. As Mr Marquise says we must follow the evidence and seek justice for the victims.

I`d not picked up on the Thurman issue until now. "Needless defence!!!!!!". He knowingly supervised the fabrication of evidence in a major terrorist case!!!!!!Oklahoma bombing). Why is that not relevent to this case? He was a senior Forensic Officer in an FBI lab.If he was involved in the deliberate fabrication of evidence in one of America`s biggest criminal investigations then all his involvements in previous investigations should be seriously questioned.How can Mr Marquise argue "The issue is the FBI Lab"? The issue is Thurman!

Dear Grendal. One of the -technical - disadvantages of this blog is that a debate of one aspect can almost not take place when "breaking news" are coming in. In the next time we all have to concentrate on the released "Megrahi-Files". But for short: 1. The 1st Iraq war produced a PROBLEM for the investigators on the ground, since Syria was now an ally of the West. 2. The SOLUTION to that problem was delivered by the CIA when they reactivated their Libyan informer Mr. Giaka. That was in the second half of December 1990. Giakas fairy tales were then "translated" into evidence. Right, Mr. Marquise?

Dear Grendal. One of the -technical - disadvantages of this blog is that a debate of one aspect can almost not take place when "breaking news" are coming in. In the next time we all have to concentrate on the released "Megrahi-Files". But for short: 1. The 1st Iraq war produced a PROBLEM for the investigators on the ground, since Syria was now an ally of the West. 2. The SOLUTION to that problem was delivered by the CIA when they reactivated their Libyan informer Mr. Giaka. That was in the second half of December 1990. Giakas fairy tales were then "translated" into evidence. Right, Mr. Marquise?

I have no opinion about Mr. Marquise's (RM)'s comments regarding the quality of the police work, but I have the following comments:

* RM writes "However, although this avenue was pursued for over two years, no evidence of any PFLP-GC involvement was ever found. The key word is evidence and I believe Ms. Peirce, as an attorney, knows, that is what one needs to have a court reach a finding of guilty."

PFLP-GC was not on trial. Mr. Megrahi was, and his guilt was to be established beyond reasonable doubt. Such a doubt have everything to do with whether the crime could with some likeliness have been done by somebody else, even if there is no evidence to support that this took place.

You don't have to have a legal background to understand this. If you one day were accused of e.g. stealing a watch from a shop, it makes a huge difference if you were alone there when the theft took place - or if there was several known shoplifters there too - even if there is no evidence against them.

The mere fact that PFLP-GC created similar bombs in casette players, and had motive and opportunity is obviously important.

* RM writes "This shopkeeper only identified one photograph in a police photo array-Mr. Megrahi-in February 1991. When the shopkeeper was interviewed in 1989 he had said the purchaser had a "Libyan accent."

RM cherry-pics from the long and complicated identification history.

* "No one associated with the Lockerbie investigation had ever heard of the MEBO Company in 1989."

It is definitely _possible_ that US intelligence long knew about who were supplying such equipment and to who, and decided to use this knowledge in a frame-up.

* RM: "Tom Thurman ... I have no intention of using this forum to do what I consider a needless defense of him."

If the information regarding Tom Thurman's falsification of material in the Oklahoma-bombing is true, we can replace "needless" with "hopeless".

* I am not an attorney and have no idea what Hans Kochler saw at the trial which caused him to doubt the verdict.

It is easy to understand, also for laymen. Google for "koechler lockerbie i-p-o.org" and read.

* " However, for all of these "circumstances" to have been true as accepted by the three original trial judges, the overall case must have been credible. In order for it all to be wrong, there would have to have been a conspiracy of the grandest order and I will state without hesitation-that is false!"

I am one of those who don't believe in the grand conspiracy. If so, it could have been done much better. But I do believe in the case being "helped" by some misguided people with lots of money with the intention to push matters towards conviction.

US/CIA history does unfortunately support the idea that this would be very possible.

I certainly didn't find Ms Peirce's article to be an "utterly devastating critique" and agree with Mr Marquise that it contained many errors of fact (i.e.Cannistraro coming out of retirement) ect.

I would note that the crucial investigative blunder was made by Chief Superintendent John Orr (of the svcottish police) when he "eliminated" Heathrow a decision Mr Marquise had no objection to. However when I was a Police Officer I conducted an investigation far more complex that Lockerbie involving some 50 countries with a team of 3-5 officers. We relied on Interpol and letters rogatory. While the FBI were welcomed the German authorities were frozen out as they disagreed with the assertion the primary suitcase arrived at Heathrow from Frankfurt. They were right!

In my experience a supposed "joint investigation" is a recipe for deceit and double-dealing.

In my view Mr Marquise was led by the nose by the CIA. When the investigators were initially casting around for likely suspects Iran, Syria, Palestinians, North Korea or some other terrorist group do you think anyone suggested the UK and the USA had a clear motive?

Marquise states that Mr Cannistraro (by no means the mastermind of this atrocity) only turned up for one metting. So why did Mr Marquise pay tribute to "numerous intelligence officials".

Mr Marquise has described the identifiaction of Megrahi as the purchaser of the clothing as "tenuous" but relied on other circumstantial evidence, the fact that he was staying in the area at the time. This is precisely how he was fitted-up.

To "Grendal". Mr Gauci didn't say the purchaser had a Libyan accent. He said he didn't speak French, therefore was not Tunisian so must have been a Libyan. I have pointed out to him that a man might speak Arabic with a regional accent but there is isn't a "Libyan accent" for a Libyan speaking Englsh. He cannot grasp this.

To Baz, ....hence the need for a "test".As I said before,I only became interested in this matter recently and haven`t really studied it in much depth.Do you know if the judges were left with the impression that Gauci had recognised a Libyan accent?Our senior investigator above certainly believes so.If what you say is true, and there is no recognisable "Libyan accent" in English, then such an impression would add,albeit in a small way, to the circumstantial evidence against al Megraghi.

FBI Special Agent und Task Force Chief Mr. Richard Marquise, please watch now the full documentary film "Lockerbie revisited" by Regisseur Gideon Levy, shown to Scottish members of Parliament about important facts on URL:

I suspect what Mr Gauci meant was that if he encountered an Arab he was usually either a Tunisian or a Libyan. If he spoke French he was Tunisian, if he spoke English Libyan. Perhaps the purchaser was Libyan. We will never know.

If you are looking into Lockerbie you might find my own articles of interest at "The Masonic Verses" at http://e-zeeecon.blogspot.com These explain why Megrahi was fitted-up, where the bomb was introduced and the relationship to further murders.

Translate

Blog Archive

About Me

Robert Black QC FRSE is now Professor Emeritus of Scots Law in the University of Edinburgh. He has been an Advocate since 1972 and a QC since 1987. He has taken a close interest in the Lockerbie affair since 1993, not least because he was born and brought up in the town, and has published a substantial number of articles on the topic in the United Kingdom and overseas. He is often referred to as the architect of the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands.

Comments

Readers are invited to comment on blog posts. All comments require to be pre-moderated by me, and I shall reject all (a) that are not related to the Lockerbie disaster or (b) that fail to meet my -- perhaps idiosyncratic -- standards of courtesy towards other contributors. Comments will not be rejected simply because I disagree with them or because I, or other contributors, find them irritating. But comments will be rejected if they distort or misrepresent the evidence; are defamatory; or if they risk embroiling me, as publisher, in defamation proceedings. I am perfectly relaxed about being sued in respect of material which I personally have posted -- but not in respect of material that others wish to post as comments and which, in any case, I often strongly disagree with.

Particularly during my sojourns in South Africa, it may not be possible for me to perform the moderation function speedily. I regret the necessity of moderation but it has been rendered inevitable by the behaviour of a particular commentator whose contributions will always and without exception be rejected.

No correspondence will be entered into regarding moderation decisions.

Contact me

If you have news or views about the Lockerbie case, you can contact me at rblackqc@outlook.com